I'm not going to lie, there is no love between me and games below 1750 points...at least in the competitive sense. Players can argue semantics if they so desire, but it is my opinion that the game is best played at 1750-2000 points. Its the sweet spot where you can build balanced lists in nearly every codex, but doesn't give any particular advantage to a specific army (i.e. Dark Eldar/Imperial Guard in low point games). At this level, you can take tactical choices in your army and actually build synergy between your units, but not to the amount of stupid 2500 points can become. And on the other side of the spectrum, going lower than 1750 points pretty much forces limitations on your list that most armies are hard pressed to cover. That makes the games much more lopsided and Paper-Rock-Scissors like, as games can simply come down to random chance. If your opponent can defeat your weakness, then the game is going to be short. Or your "deathstar" unit is simply unstoppable, because your opponent didn't have enough points to build enough counters into his list. The game simply is not as fun to me at this level.

So what is my point? I build my lists for 2000 points, and on occasion 1850, as that is what most tournaments demand here in the States. These lists work at their designated points level. While I'm happy to take requests for scaling down my lists to lower points levels (i.e. 1500), the lists do not work as they should. Too much is being sacrificed and the list loses its synergy. Thus, any low/mid-point range list based off one of my 2000 point armies, have no guarantees of success. It is better to build a new list from scratch, as even a few hundred points can change the whole philosophy of an army. Just remember that when/if you ask me to scale my lists down. Don't expect miracles. :D

I agree that the game works "best" in the 2000 point range because you can build good balanced lists there. I also agree that the FOC "breaks" at the 2500-3000 point level (IOW, you would do better buying two detachments than trying to buy some filler in a stray FOC slot).). I also agree that as the points levels shrink, it becomes harder and harder to build a multiple redundant list. OTOH, that is part of the challenge.

The way I build lists mainly works around either building up from 500 points or building down from 2000. Odd? Well, yes, but I want my lists to be as scalable as possible and it helps me think that way.

Having more points does provide more buffering against streaky dice, but it by all means does not prevent streaky dice from swinging a game. Generally that means it takes more (un)lucky rolls to make the dice more dominant than skill, but not always, depending on the list...;).

It also appears to me that older codices have an issue with lower point levels when they "stray" from the more cost efficient effective lists. Black Templar mech lists are a perfect example, because all of our Rhino body vehicles are overpriced and take up too great a percentage of the list to work as well at lower point levels.

Reply

Greg

4/26/2012 05:40:47 am

We play almost exclusively at 1500 points locally. The reason being is the length of games is significantly shortened. Thus instead of just being able to play a few games, we can get in 3-4 in the same time frame. This allows everyone to play against more armies, and try new lists out against a large variety.

Also when we have even numbers, we like to do team battles, as it's grand fun. Team battles at 2k points take an entire day...

I feel the BT's scale quite well at 1500 points, and feel they are quite strong at that point level.

Leave a Reply.

Laeroth's Blog

This blog is devoted to the Black Templars chapter and the tactics, list building, and general musing associated with them. Readers will see posts from both Schlitzaf and Marshal Laeroth regularly. Enjoy!